Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4224 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

Portability of long service leave raises costs. Indeed, the respected industrial relations newspaper Workplace Express said of the discussion paper on long service leave released by the Cole royal commission that it was "generally agreed that portable long service leave schemes raise the cost of employment in the building and construction industry". The newspaper report went on to say that the discussion paper had issued the following warning:

This may have a flow-on effect to employment in the industry as higher costs can lead to employers employing fewer people or choosing workers who do not carry a long service leave obligation.

The exclusion of particulars workers from participating in portable long service leave schemes also created an anomaly in the construction industry that unfairly disadvantaged those not employed on construction sites.

That is what the commission said. The newspaper report goes on to say that the commission had identified management factors that affected the implementation of long service leave schemes in the industry. Finally, in reference to portability, the Cole commission stated that lower returns on investments, the maturing of schemes, increased wages from enterprise bargaining and increased employee benefits were significant factors that affected workers' access to long service leave. The Cole commission wants to look at these schemes and see how they could be made more fair and, where there are administrative impediments, they want to clean them out so that the majority of workers can access their entitlements.

I think that the governments sees this as a sacred cow to be milked in terms of applying yet another imposition on business.

Mr Corbell: That is really mixing metaphors.

MR PRATT: Indeed. Ms MacDonald points out in paragraph 3 (b) of her motion that some industries in the ACT have portable long service leave. Of course they do. The two industries that are identified with-

Ms MacDonald: Three.

MR PRATT: Okay, but the two most important ones with non-career structures are allowed portability. Indeed, the ACT is the only jurisdiction in the country to provide portability to the cleaning industry; that is, the act is already most generous in its long service leave provisions. Why tinker with it?

In paragraph 3 (d) of the motion, Ms MacDonald raises the issue of "the impact of female earnings". If this relates to maternity issues, there are other provisions that come into play and the two employment conditions should not be confused or compared. I point out that the report of the Goward review is just arriving and it would be wise to fully examine those findings, otherwise the relevance of female earnings to the issue being discussed today in this motion is perhaps non-existent.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .